Chan, P W and Cooper, R (2005) Passion for learning: Consider the project mission. In: Khosrowshahi, F (ed.) Proceedings of 21st Annual ARCOM Conference, 7-9 September 2005, London, UK.
Abstract
Organisational learning is a concept that has proliferated within the discourse of construction management research over the last decade. Proponents of learning espouse that it is imperative for construction organisations to learn in order to maintain survival and success. However, the concept of organisational learning remains unclear and the semantics confusing. Moreover, the onus of learning rests upon individuals and hence it is necessary to consider how individuals learn that might contribute to project success. This paper therefore explores the individual's passion for learning and attempts to link this with project performance. It is believed that passion derives from knowing what the project mission is all about. Through a reflection of two case studies, we endeavour to show that passion for learning stems from the clarity of the project mission and the buy-in of the individuals that work on the project. Additionally, we suggest that high passion for learning would impact on project performance in terms of meeting time and cost targets.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | case studies; learning; performance; project |
| Index terms: | organizational learning, construction organization, management research, semantics, case study, project success, reflection, project performance, survival |
| Subjects: | research design and methodology, organization, data collection methods, analytical methods, environmental science, project management theory and practice, professional development |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Information Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here